This is where the Catholic church is confused. Paul lays out clearly in I Timothy 3 what the qualifiactions of a bishop are and one of those is that he is to be married and have children. The Roman Catholic disqualifies married men from this just because they are married.
What Paul is really saying here is that a Bishop must be “mature and responsible.”
These “exceptions” are just that. The issue is what I stated previously.
How about the immaculate conception and her assumption. Where are these things taught in Scripture?
Reply:
No, it’s not the RCC who disqualifies, but rather the one who chooses, one supposes with the grace of God to get married.
Fact: One does not have to get married, and one does not have to become a priest.
They are personal life choices.
I would urge caution in thinking that the RCC is “confused.” We are some 2000 years old, believing (with the aid of the H.S.) and teaching for the most part the same doctrines and dogmas that we have always taught. two thousand years of constant papal rule. Jesus Himself promised that the gates of hell would not prevail againt THE ONLY Church actually founded by Jesus Himself. Mt. 16:13-20
Also the Bible is factually and historically a Catholic book. The entire New Testament was written by Catholics. The RCC was the only Christian Church for nearly 1,500 years!
and the Catholic Bible the only bible until 1611, when Luther modified the “Latin Vulgate” to meet his needs. Having read the KJV, I suspect that about 90% is still based on the Catholic Bible. Did you know that? (Meaning that they say the same thing.) The difference is not so much what they say, but how they are interpeted
In 1960 there were about 3,000 different Christian denomonations, today there are about 40,000
Yet, there is only one truth. Period.
Odds are you’ll find, if you pray, the fullness of truth in the RCC, because that where it is. Amen
Keep in mind Paul’s writting were written before any of the four Gospels, nearly 2000 years ago. He was writting to people of his time, and very likely had no idea that the Church would accept his teaching for all times and publish them in the “Cannon of the bible.” The message always applies to us but has to be understood in the context of who was writting and to whom he was speaking to gain a fuller understanding of the passage.
One also has to seperate RCC PRACTICE, which can and does change, from official doctrine and dogma, which can “gain a fuller understanding,” BUT at base, cannot change.
As I had hoped to make clear, celebacy is ONLY a RCC practice. It could, and some certainly would like to see it changed, but I personally find it unlikely, because what the RCC has done (FOR THE MOST PART) in seeking celebant priest and religious, has worked quite well over a 2000 year period. We continued to be the largest Christian denomination in the world.
I would share with you also, that you see many priest and religious wearing “wedding bands,” often on their right hand. This signifies in their minds and hearts, that they are married to the “Bride of Christ” His Church, or for female religious, they often considered themselves “married to Christ.”
As for the Marian issues, they are easy but very time consumming to respond to, so it will have to wait until tomorrow. I have to prepare for a Bible Study class, that I co-teach this evening. I will respond to them for you.
I’ll keep you in my prayers and ask that you do the same for me.
THANKS for allowing me to share RC beliefs with you. It is such a previledge. God Bless you.
Tony